1. Field of the Invention
The invention relates to an aircraft wing or a airfoil used to increase the lifting capacity and improve flight performance of an aircraft in takeoff, clime, cruse, and landing with the addition of two or more oval diskettes designed to employ laminar flow technology that will increase lift without additional drag due to wetted area.
2. Discussion of Prior Art
A wing that is high lift is also high drag and to date to have a wing perform at high cruse speed but still provide adequate lift for safe operations at takeoff and landing, a number of slats on the leading edge and a number of flaps on the trailing edge have been employed to give a overall solution to the high lift/high drag problem. Nowak with U.S. Pat. No. 5,772,155, Jun. 30, 1998 and Oulton with U.S. Pat. No. 3,776,491, Dec. 4, 1973 employed preexisting wing form with a delta and a rectangular structure that is designed for high lift and must be retracted back into a wing for cruse flight.
Nowak, U.S. Pat. No. 5,772,155, provides a delta flap on the top of a wing that is deployable from the top surface when the aircraft needs extra lift. Its delta shape is very thin and is to be deflective on the flow separation over the main wing. It is a airflow control device and it must be retracted into the main wing because of it drag implications for cruse flight. Its use is when high lift is required at subsonic speeds and when a wing is stalled. Its primary design is at low speed high angle of attack situations where a potential flow separation on the main wing could occure and a flow director would be useful. The Nowak does not address cruse flight; it is a stall inhibiter design. And this prior art does not use laminar flow, a oval shape with measurable lifting dimensions and a structure for simple attachment to any preexisting wing. It is a wing slat at the rear of wing.
Oulton, U.S. Pat. No. 3,776,491, provides a compound wing that are retracted into the main wing and deployed in a complex mechanical manner to position the compound wing for added lift. This compound wings are traditional wings that conform to the design of the main wing in width and span. Addition of additional wings has long been a problem in the added induced drag that such plane forms bring to a aircraft performance. The compound wing approach applies traditional wing with its measurable lift and measurable drag features. And this prior art does not use laminar flow technology, a oval shape lifting surface and a structure for simple attachment to any preexisting wing.
Prior art in the field of aircraft wing design and its improvement has been most successful with the application of slats on leading edge of wings and flaps on the trailing edge of a wing. Since D. Davis 1937 ‘Fluid Foil’ most aviation design has not made much use of the laminar flow technology because of problems of aluminum construction.
The problem with most wing and airfoil designs is found with the flexing of the skin surface of a wing. This flexing breaks the necessary surface smoothness that is needed to help hold laminar flow air close to the wing skin. To date the control of laminar flow air has been effected by vortex generators, blown flaps, suction and small high drag flaps that are positioned to force air to stay laminar. Most of these devices must be retracted due to high induced drag and will only serve the aircraft at a specific speed. The other penalty that is common among the prior art form is one of complexity of mechanical retraction and the weight that is associated with the addition of slats, flaps, vortex generators, and delta flap generators. This complexity is seen in Lane U.S. Pat. No. 2,275,777 with its wing extension and also in Potoczek U.S. Pat. No. 2,148,962 with its wing extension to increase wing for take off and landings. The drag penalties are well known and the patents like Bugatti U.S. Pat. No. 2,279,615 where designed for takeoff and landing and to be retracted for all other flight conditions.
The important area of concern for aircraft design in wing design and shape of a airfoil is predicated on performance. Early biplanes had great lift but high drag and thus low maximum speed range. Monoplanes had less drag but also less lift and speed was the performance goal. To add a flying surface to a monoplane was to add drag and reduce speed; thus the solution was first the addition of a leading edge slat then a trailing flap and then boundary layer flow control. All these solutions are designed to aid an aircraft that is designed to fly fast and land at a safe speed that reduces the aircraft exposure to stall and spin while in the takeoff or landing approach phase of flight. These devices must be retracted and stowed out of the airstreams while the aircraft is in clime, cruse and decent phase of flight.
In Nowak U.S. Pat. No. 5,772,155 it is noted that as opposed to a trailing or leading edge flap system or slats in use with present aircraft that are deployable attached to the leading or trailing edges; it is proposed to deploy a delta shape flap above a wing to control boundary layer when the aircraft is exposed to a stall. This flap would be retracted as are the other systems of flaps and slats due to their heavy induced drag penalties and not designed to add extra lift; it is designed to maintain the design lift of the wing.
A oval diskette that is designed to make use of laminar flow air for added lift that combines with what is known as favorable interference of multiple lifting airfoils that operate in close proximity is not known in the prior art.